Pages

Intersect

Paula Johanson
written for The Many Masks/Masques of Heidegger: Technology, Poeisis and Humanism: A Literary Theory Research Group Symposium

May 7th, 2014, Vancouver Island University
The Seminar for Advanced Studies in the Humanities

Directed by Richard J. Lane and Emily Marroquin

WhereHeideggerandDoctorowIntersect

intheCreativeCommonsLicensingofPirateCinema.

It might seem odd to discuss a science fiction novel for
young adults at a symposium that focuses on an article by Heidegger, but there
is a place where the interests of the philosopher Heidegger intersect with the
interests of novelist Cory Doctorow. That place is the issue of Creative
Commons licensing. ThenovelsofCanadianauthorCoryDoctorowhaveallbeenreleasedinfreedigitaldownloadformatsimultaneouswitheachtitle'sreleaseinprintformat.ThiscontroversialmarketingparadigmisacrucialelementinDoctorow's creative paradigm and in his entrepreneurialactivitiesintheemergingdigitaleconomy.Forthereleaseofhis2012novelPirateCinema,DoctorowhasamendedhisusualCreativeCommonsLicenseforthisnoveltoindicatethatnoderivativeworksaretobeallowedwithoutpermission.ThissubtlebutsignificantchangeshowshowDoctorow,likeHeidegger,iscallingforanunderstandingoftechnologywhichprimarilyinvolvescreativity.

In the article “The Question
Concerning Technology” Heidegger stated: “It is said that modern
technology is something incomparably different from all earlier technologies
because it is based on modern physics as an exact science.”[1] It
could similarly be said that modern publishing
technology is something incomparably different from all earlier publishing
technologies because it is based on modern technologies of exact copies of a
text. There are certainly publishers who are attempting to manage differently
the rights to books published through the modern technology of electronic
format – differently, that is, from how they manage the rights of books
published in print format, and that difference is brought to public notice by
Cory Doctorow in his published statements on publishing, copyright, and
creativity.

Where Heidegger’s article discusses technology which
primarily involves creativity, the philosopher is clearly discussing matters of
publishing, distribution, copyright and other rights, saying that

Thereare,ofcourse,regulationsbysomepublishersforthesecurityofdigitalrightsmanagement(DRM)ofbooksinelectronicformat
(e-books). These regulationsare farstricterthanthoseinplaceforprintedbooks.AsDoctorowdiscussesonhiswebsite,DRMfore-booksdoesnotpermitbook-buyerstoloane-bookstofriends or put
an e-book in another format or device, treating such acts as piracy which coststhepublisherthelossofasale.
“TheentertainmentindustrycallsDRM
'security'software,becauseitmakesthemsecurefromtheircustomers,”
wroteDoctorowinacolumnfortheGuardian.

Doctorow
is not the only writer who disagrees with DRM software for e-books; in interviews,
Neil Gaiman has said, “Everyone who discovered your favorite author by borrowing
a book, raise your hand.”[3]As Doctorow wrote on his website's page for his novel
Little Brother, “For me -- for pretty
much every writer -- the big problem isn't piracy, it's obscurity. Of all the
people who failed to buy this book today, the majority did so because they
never heard of it, not because someone gave them a free copy.”[4]

Doctorow'sopinionsaremadeclearnotonlyinhisinterviewsandnonfictionwriting;hestatesonp292ofhisnovelPirateCinemathroughhisprotagonist, “Ithinkthatalawthatprotectscreativityshouldprotectallcreativity,notjustthekindofcreativitythatwassuccessfulfiftyyearsago.” In particular, one type of creativity that
Doctorow promotes is the creation of derivative works. Derivativeworksarebasedonpublishedworks,and take many formssuchase-booksinnewformats,translations,orillustrationsandotherobjects.Somederivativeworksaresoldcommercially.Forexample,theentiretextofa2010novelbyDoctorow,LittleBrother,isnowavailableprintedonaposterfromLitographs,a company thatbuysadvertisingspaceonDoctorow’sownwebsite.Thisposterisaderivativework,soldcommerciallywithpermission.[5]

LongbeforeandafterAbbieHoffmanpublishedhis1971bestsellerStealThisBook,peoplehavebeen loaning books, selling them second-hand or
giving them away,and some people have been distributingcopiesorderivativeworks.Nobodyhastosteal
a bookbyCoryDoctorow.
He givesawayelectroniccopiesof
his books forfreeonhisownwebsite,andmakesthemavailable
to read inseveralformatssuchasPDFfilesorMOBIfiles.
HisnovelsarereleasedwithCreativeCommonslicensing.[7]Forhis
earlier novelssuchasLittleBrother,Doctorowhaschosen “Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike.” In
contrast to his earlier novels, the Creative Commons licensing that Doctorow
has chosen for his work Pirate Cinema is
“Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs.” On his website's
page for Pirate Cinema he lists several files containing the text of the
novel. “ThesedownloadsarelicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivslicense,whichletsyoushareit,providedthatyoudosoonanoncommercialbasis,”
Doctorowwrotebelowthelist.
“Ifyou'dliketomakearemix,pleasegetintouchwithus.”[8]

ThemaindifferencebetweentheNoDerivativesandtheShareAlikelicensingisthatDoctorow
is asking peopletolethimknowiftheyaremakingaderivativework,
simply sothathecandiscussanytranslationswithhisforeignrightsagents.
He explains on the website that he wants to make it easier for his agents to
work with foreign editors, and adds: “Ipromiseyouthatifyouwritetomewitharequestforanon-commercialderivativeuse,thatIwilldoeverythinginmypowertoseethatitisauthorized.”[9] With this small change in his
novel’s licensing, Doctorow is regulating the transformation and distribution
of his novel, challenging the DRM approach to “unlocking,transforming,storing,distributing,andswitchingabout” (to use
Heidegger’s phrase)of e-books.

Issuesofcopyrightandlicensingareofinterestto book agents as well as lawyers,suchasStuartLangley[10]whohaswrittenaboutthecopyrightissuesinPirateCinemaforthewebsiteLawandtheMultiverse, and alsoforculturalanthropologistssuchasBrianThom[11],whowroteinhisthesisaboutCoastSalishliteraturechallengingcolonialpower. Even for people with a vested interest in copyright
and licensing, deconstructiveandperformativenotionsofsubjectivityandaestheticsarepretty stuffy whentheycomefrompeoplewho aren't – or don’tthinktheyare – constructorsofaestheticworks. Heidegger’s tone throughout his article is stiff.Bycontrast,there'ssomethingheartfeltandauthenticinthestatementsbyDoctorow's teen protagonistashelearnsduringthenoveltothinkofhimselfasonekindofartistamongmany. “Wealluseotherpeoples'words!Wedidn'tinventEnglish,weinheritedit!” insistshisyoungprotagonist. “ ...Allthedialogeverwrittenisinspiredbyotherpeoples'dialog.Imakenewwordsoutofthem,mywords,butthey'renotlike,mine-mine,notlikemyunderpantsaremine!They'remine,butthey'reyourstomakeintoyourwords,too!”[12] It
might be unexpected to link Heidegger with underpants, but that esthetic
challenge is appropriate from Doctorow, who has received multiple literary
awards, most notably the Prometheus Award for works that dramatize the perennial conflict between
liberty and authority, expose or satirize abuses of government power, and
champion individual rights. The only other intersection between Heidegger’s
article and Doctorow at this time is Heidegger’s focus on poesis and Doctorow’s naming of his daughter Poesy – a small and
tenuous link between minds that are unexpectedly alike in spite of all their
different works.

Incontrasttohisearliernovels,theCreativeCommonslicensingthatDoctorowhaschosen for his work Pirate Cinemais “Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs3.0Unported.”Statedsimply,anyoneisfreetosharethisworkwithothers,tocopyandredistributethematerialinanymediumorformat,underthefollowingterms.

No additional restrictions: You may not apply legal terms or
technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the
license permits. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the
license terms are followed.

Doctorow notes on his website’s page about Little Brother the following: